You are using an outdated browser and your browsing experience will not be optimal. Please update to the latest version of Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox. Install Microsoft Edge

July 23, 2021

Vietnam: New Decree Tightens Regulations on Cross-Border Online Advertising

Subscribe to Updates

To enforce more rigorous control of cross-border advertising activities, the Vietnamese government issued Decree No. 70/2021/ND-CP dated July 20, 2021 (Decree 70), amending and supplementing provisions of Decree No. 181/2013/ND-CP dated November 14, 2013, elaborating on some articles of the Law on Advertising. Decree 70 will take effect on September 15, 2021.

According to the Deputy Director of the Authority of Broadcasting and Electronic Information, Decree 70 will allow better control over cross-border advertisement on platforms such as Facebook or YouTube. To that end, Decree 70 stipulates new obligations for these providers while also consolidating executive authority over cross-border advertising activities under the Ministry of Information and Communications (MIC).

Revised Obligations for Cross-Border Advertising Services

Significantly, Decree 70 overhauls Article 13, which provides the definitions and obligations for cross-border advertising service providers. Accordingly, cross-border advertising services are explained as the utilization of websites hosted outside Vietnam to provide ads targeted at Vietnamese consumers and obtain revenue in Vietnam. Notably, Article 13 defines such websites as a “single or multi-website system …  providing users with services for storage, provision, use, search, or exchange of information, sound or image sharing, forum creation, or live chat to supply advertising services.” This would effectively encompass many types of online environments, specifically social network sites, such as Facebook.

In addition, more entities will be taxed on cross-border advertising revenue under Article 13, including not only service providers but also both domestic and overseas advertisers.

Under Decree 70, cross-border advertising services must comply with Vietnam’s cybersecurity and intellectual property laws in addition to the Law on Advertising. Decree 70 requires foreign providers of cross-border advertising services to supply the MIC with direct contact information 15 days before commencing cross-border advertising activities in Vietnam. Domestic advertising service providers that cooperate with foreign entities to provide cross-border advertising services in Vietnam must submit annual or ad hoc reports in a prescribed form as stipulated under the decree.

Service providers must also block and remove illegal or infringing content from their advertising platforms upon the MIC’s request, as well as supply information on organizations or individuals suspected of illegal online advertising activities.

Decree 70 also grants advertisers the right to demand that service providers not place advertising products in content that violates the law (particularly Article 8.1 of Cybersecurity Law and Article 28 of IP Law) and supply means for monitoring and removing illegal advertising content.

MIC’s Control over Cross-Border Advertising Services

In the past, cross-border advertising services were under the supervision and management of different authorities. Decree 70 revises this and consolidates all supervisory authority under the MIC. Departments and agencies of all levels must vigilantly detect illegal cross-border advertising activities and report to the MIC. Within a five-day window, the MIC will conduct investigations and notify service providers of the illegal ad content or activities that must be addressed or removed in 24 hours. If service providers fail to adhere to the MIC’s request, the MIC will take any appropriate legal measures to block the illegal advertisement. This authority is also extended to other competent agencies should the offense threaten Vietnam’s national security. It is unclear what the blocking measures would entail under Decree 70, and it will be interesting to see how this mechanism works in the future.

Related Professionals

Industries

Consumer Products

Technology

Practices

Corporate/M&A

Intellectual Property

Regulatory Affairs

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

March 16, 2026
Thailand’s Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has broadened the definition of institutional investors, expanded the types of qualifying investments, and updated financial qualification thresholds for various investor categories through a revised notification on the definitions of institutional investors, ultra-high net worth investors, and high net worth investors. The amended framework, which came into force on March 1, 2026, adds digital asset business operators, investment planners, and investment consultants to the roster of entities recognized as institutional investors, and broadens the definition of investment to account for digital tokens. Expanded Definition of Institutional Investors Under the SEC’s revised notification, the category of institutional investors now expressly includes digital asset business operators licensed under the Royal Decree on Digital Asset Businesses B.E. 2561 (2018). This addition recognizes the growing role of digital asset platforms and service providers in Thailand’s investment ecosystem and aligns the regulatory treatment of digital markets with that of traditional markets. The definition of institutional investors now also encompasses investment planners and investment consultants approved by the SEC. Previously, only SEC-approved investment analysts held this status; the expansion covers a broader scope of professionals who possess comparable expertise and experience in evaluating investment opportunities. Broadened Investment Definition The revised framework now defines investment to mean direct or indirect investment in a wider range of assets beyond deposits. Specifically, the definition covers: Securities under the Securities and Exchange Act Derivatives under the Derivatives Act Investment tokens offered to the public Government-issued digital tokens (G-tokens) as specified in a separate SEC notification This expansion ensures that financial status assessments reflect the full spectrum of an investor’s holdings, including emerging digital assets. Updated Financial Qualification Thresholds The amended SEC notification also provides updated qualification thresholds for angel investors, ultra-high net worth investors, and high net worth investors. While the core criteria
Read More
March 13, 2026
Vietnam’s Law on Intellectual Property (IP Law) has undergone continuous amendment in recent years, with the latest amendment issued at the end of 2025. Among the amended and supplemented provisions, the regulation that has perhaps attracted the most attention is a provision relating to the use of protected IP objects by artificial intelligence (AI) systems. Specifically, Article 7 of the 2025 IP Law introduces a completely new Clause 5, which reads in full as follows: “Organizations and individuals are permitted to use texts and data relating to intellectual property objects that have been lawfully published, and which the public is allowed to access, for the purposes of scientific research, experimentation, and training of artificial intelligence systems, provided that such use will not unreasonably affect the legitimate rights and interests of the authors and intellectual property rights holders in accordance with this Law. With respect to texts and data that are objects protected by copyright and related rights, the use of the texts and data as set forth herein must also be in accordance with the regulations of the Government.” Analyzing this newly added provision in the context of how it was conceived, as well as the challenges that still lie ahead, can provide some interesting insights. From Aspirations to Flight in Science and Technology From the end of 2024 and throughout 2025—the 50th anniversary of the country’s reunification—Vietnam witnessed numerous sweeping changes in many areas, including legislative development. It could be said that no sessions of the National Assembly have ever adopted as many laws, resolutions, and major policies as this one. The aspirations of the highest-level leadership have been concretized into major law and policy projects, which were drafted, developed, and passed at record speed. All of this was aimed at building a foundation for Vietnam to achieve
Read More
March 12, 2026
Thailand’s AI legislative framework took another step forward when the Office of the Consumer Protection Board (OCPB) issued a notification establishing guidelines for AI-generated advertising that may cause material misunderstanding about products or services. The notification, which is already in effect, was issued under the Consumer Protection Act B.E. 2522 (1979) and its amendments, which prohibit advertising that is unfair to consumers or may cause harm to society, including false or exaggerated statements and statements that may cause material misunderstanding about products or services. The notification addresses emerging advertising practices, including the use of images edited using software or AI to attract consumer interest or build credibility. The OCPB noted that such advertising may result in consumers misunderstanding the essential characteristics, condition, or usage of products, which violates consumer rights and causes damage. Key Requirements on AI-Generated or Digitally Manipulated Advertising Content For advertisements using still images or videos created or edited with software programs or AI tools that may cause the depicted product or service to differ from the actual product sold or service provided—which may cause misunderstanding regarding the condition, quality, quantity, or other essential aspects of the products or services—advertisers and business operators must comply with the following requirements: Prior authorization. Obtain approval from relevant regulatory authorities where required by law. Accurate representation. Ensure that the advertised size, quantity, volume, number, or composition matches the actual product or service being sold, whether in still images or videos. Mandatory AI disclosure labels. Display clear disclosures when AI or software is used to create or edit images, such as: “Real image or simulation edited using AI” “Photo from actual location or simulation edited using AI” “Photo from actual product or edited simulation” “Image created by AI” “Video created by AI” Clarity of disclosure. Ensure disclosures are clearly visible,
Read More
March 10, 2026
Thailand’s Ministry of Finance and Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) have issued regulations broadening the criteria for determining who qualifies as a “major shareholder” of licensed securities and digital asset business operators. Under relevant SEC regulations, major shareholders of a regulated entity must obtain regulatory approval and undergo screening by the SEC. The revised framework introduces both shareholding-based and control-based tests to determine which shareholders require regulatory approval for a wider range of indirect ownership structures and de facto control. The Ministry of Finance notification took effect on February 21, 2026, while the SEC’s clarifying rules took effect on March 4, 2026. These changes aim to enhance transparency around beneficial ownership and strengthen regulatory oversight of entities operating in Thailand’s capital markets. Expanded Definition Under the revised framework, a “major shareholder” now includes persons who directly or indirectly hold more than 10% of the voting rights in a regulated company, as well as persons who exercise control over the regulated company or its shares. This system of two separate tests, based on both shareholding and control, differs from the prior regime, which focused primarily on shareholding thresholds and applied a more limited method for determining indirect shareholdings. The two tests (detailed below) operate independently of each other, and any person identified by either of the tests will be deemed a major shareholder. Shareholding-Based Test Broadens Indirect Ownership Attribution For the shareholding-based test, the SEC recognizes two existing methods for identifying indirect ownership, together with a new proportional attribution method. Any person captured under these methods, which are described below, will be regarded as a major shareholder of the regulated company and must obtain SEC approval as a major shareholder. First, the existing framework continues to apply to both first-tier and chain ownership structures. Approval is required for (1) first-tier
Read More